Cause of d eath: Cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression
And Chauvin kept the knee on Floyd's neck, including after Floyd stopped talking and moving. He could have shifted the knee from his neck onto his back, or rolled Floyd around and give CPR (this might have been unsafe if Floyd was playing possum, but with 4 or more police officers...), or try to see if he could get Floyd to talk or check whether he was conscious, etc., but Chauvin instead just kept having one knee on his neck, not even shifting that knee onto the back or similar. The bystanders didn't help matters, however, since they kept yelling and acting threateningly, which made it more important for the police officers to maintain the pin (George Floyd was not a small man and had a record for violence apart from resisting arrest), but there were still 4 or more police officers. As far as I can tell, Chauvin should be investigated for intentional murder.
Apart from lots of other stuff in Floyd's blood, such as methamphetamine.
While I am by no means a doctor, as far as I can skim on the net, 11 ng/mL is definitely a lethal dose, as others seem to have died from such a dose, see for instance https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/pdfs/mm6604a4.pdf .
And I recall reading something about Floyd saying "I can't breath"while standing up before he was pinned or restrained. That fits very well with overdoses of various stuff.
It may well have been the case that Floyd was doomed to die from an overdose of various drugs that day without meeting any police officers. But Chauvin's knee on his neck cannot have helped at all, and Chauvin could have done things very, very differently. And then there are the rumours that Chauvin knew Floyd before-hand. It seems really, really strange.
Aside from that George Floyd should not be evangelized at all, given his robberies, home invasions, pointing a gun at a pregnant women, his long criminal record, resisting arrest, possible drug dealing with hard drugs, etc., etc., etc. Donald Trump has already taken action reg. the fentanyl imports that China is using against the USA to spread addiction and death, and from what I hear, Floyd was unemployed due to the Chinese virus.
And the looters obviously ought to spend much or most of their lives in prison.
Definitely not murder because he didn't mean to kill him. The proof of that is that he followed the procedure that he's been taught.
Knee on the back of the neck should not make breathing more difficult. Ironically what you suggested, putting the knee on the back, does prevent breathing.
Laying on the stomach is also the best position for breathing, in fact that's how hospitals put the Chinese virus patients who can't breathe. Most people don't know, but the lungs are more in the back than in the front.
Still, we know, absolutely, that it's not normal for police officers to kneel on the back of people's necks, because if that was normal then just about all of them would have broken peoples’ necks.
The proof of that is that he followed the procedure that he's been taught.
Do you have any sources of him "following protocol" or "followed the procedure that he's been taught"?
That report is just describing the circumstances. It's not the result of an autopsy.
It also mentions "restraint" and that normally doesn't kill people.
Following protocol: the source was just posted by another pede in response to my comment above.
Credit it's his, I'll just relink it here for your convenience
Still, we know, absolutely, that it's not normal for police officers to kneel on the back of people's necks, because if that was normal then just about all of them would have broken peoples’ necks.
That report is just describing the circumstances. It's not the result of an autopsy. It also mentions "restraint" and that normally doesn't kill people.
"Just describing the circumstances". Why would they specifically mention "neck compression" as a *"complication reg. the cause of death"?
And in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6F62EdX_yg , George Floyd specifically mentions "Please, the knee in my neck, I can't breathe shit.", around 0:20 . Shouldn't protocol demand of Chauvin that he should take special care and consideration and ensure that the suspect resisting arrest can breath and is not dying?
Thank you for the source, though I have to skim through it to find the sources it uses, it is not itself a proper source. It seems to be this file here: https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/sites/default/files/Documents/PoliceCommission/minneapolis%20ced%20policy.pdf (I assume that source is trustworthy, though I wouldn't know, it is also from something like "sanfranciscopolice.org"... why would the police of San Francisco have that file? And why would they use the top-level domain '.org'???). And from that file, I am not at all convinced that Chauvin did indeed follow protocol. Page 7 seems to be the relevant part. What is your argument that Chauvin is indeed following the protocol as described on page 7 and elsewhere? Especially reg. Chauvin continuing to use the neck restraint even after George Floyd stopped moving and talking? And without even checking up on whether he was conscious or breathing? Not changing the restraint? Or any other of a large number of actions? Again, there were 4 or more officers. And when George Floyd says things like:
"Please, the knee in my neck, I can't breathe shit."
Isn't that an absolutely obvious cue that special care is needed, especially when Floyd stops moving and talking? Does the protocol require police officers to monitor and check subjects that are restrained whether they are breathing, conscious or possibly dying? Or any other related actions, especially when they have stopped moving and talking while under neck restraint?
Neck compression just means there was pressure on his neck. If you look at the details of the autopsy, there was no bruising of neck muscles, so obviously there wasn’t much pressure exerted at all.
Minneapolis PD guidelines also stated that neck restraints using your leg are legal. They only disallowed chokeholds.
Neck compression just means there was pressure on his neck. If you look at the details of the autopsy, there was no bruising of neck muscles, so obviously there wasn’t much pressure exerted at all.
But isn't it significant that it is directly mentioned as a complication reg. the cause of death?
Minneapolis PD guidelines also stated that neck restraints using your leg are legal. They only disallowed chokeholds.
If you have a source reg. that, I would appreciate it if you would post it. The only source I have really seen reg. that is from a medium post (which is copy-pasted on a blog post on a website called amren.com which has been linked elsewhere in the comments here): https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/sites/default/files/Documents/PoliceCommission/minneapolis%20ced%20policy.pdf .The link points to a document on a website supposedly for the San Francisco police department, despite its TLD being .org. I don't know whether that document is fake or not, though I would very much appreciate if you happen to know a better source than that.
You go from the "knee cannot have helped at all" (true) and your conclusion here is he likely committed "intentional murder." See the problem here? You seem to have the logical mindset of a personal injury attorney.
As far as I can tell, Chauvin should be investigated for intentional murder.
You write:
[...] your conclusion here is he likely committed "intentional murder."
I think that it at the very least should be investigated for intentional murder, for it seems extremely off in multiple regards (seriously? Kneeling on the neck? Not providing aid or checking? Etc. etc. etc. etc.).
And you also leave out other parts of my argumentation. What about this part of my comment?:
[...], and Chauvin could have done things very, very differently. And then there are the rumours that Chauvin knew Floyd before-hand. It seems really, really strange.
Why did Chauvin not change his pin from having a knee on the neck to having a knee on the back, or otherwise change the pin, after Floyd stopped moving? Why not see if Floyd is conscious or breathing? Or check if he might need CPR? Floyd repeatedly complained about not being able to breath. Does the police officer not have an obligation to provide life-saving measures if a suspect is dying while being pinned, especially given that the suspect nor others can help in such a case? The bystanders did not help matters at all, but there was still 4+ police officers.
And then there is the possible part about Floyd and Chauvin knowing each other, which I also mention.
What you are advocating for is wrong, as is your reasoning and here's why:
Officers know or have at least heard of people who have extremely long wrap sheets that involve violent crime and serious drug abuse. So, that information is irrelevant on it's own unless you can prove that Chauvin responded to a call specifically because it involved Floyd but even then that seems pretty flimsy.
There are protocols in place for virtually every type of arrest situation. If Chauvin and his fellow officers are following that protocol, by definition they are not at fault. Again you need to have some basic understanding of how police work or any bureaucratic agency works. Doesn't make his actions righteous or "good," but it does make them "not criminal." So, if they are following protocol then there is no case at all.
Not administering help to Floyd is only a crime if it is apparent to the officer that he is in need of medical help AND that they can safely provide it to him. If they did see he needed help and failed to provide it- which is very hard to prove considering the scene of the incident- then that is still not "intentional murder" but rather some degree of potentially criminal negligence.
This should sum it up for you. Those are the three major flaws in your argument. It's not about what is right or what should have happened, it's about what did happen and who should be responsible for what part of it.
Officers know or have at least heard of people who have extremely long wrap sheets that involve violent crime and serious drug abuse. So, that information is irrelevant on it's own unless you can prove that Chauvin responded to a call specifically because it involved Floyd but even then that seems pretty flimsy.
This argument does not make any sense, Chauvin did not have to know at all that it was Floyd before responding, he could very easily recognize that it was Floyd once he was on the scene.
There are protocols in place for virtually every type of arrest situation. If Chauvin and his fellow officers are following that protocol, by definition they are not at fault. Again you need to have some basic understanding of how police work or any bureaucratic agency works. Doesn't make his actions righteous or "good," but it does make them "not criminal." So, if they are following protocol then there is no case at all.
Sources for what protocols they were or were not following? Sources and arguments for Chauvin and others actually following these protocols? Do all protocols specify everything in great detail? Or do they require officers to follow them meaningfully? And are you certain that Chauvin did not break, or grossly break, these protocols?
Not administering help to Floyd is only a crime if it is apparent to the officer that he is in need of medical help AND that they can safely provide it to him. If they did see he needed help and failed to provide it- which is very hard to prove considering the scene of the incident- then that is still not "intentional murder" but rather some degree of potentially criminal negligence.
.............................. do you even believe your own writing here?
"Please, the knee in my neck, I can't breath shit."
EDIT: and him not moving or talking at some point, with others pointing it out? They talking about him possibly being drugged up? Etc. etc. etc. etc.?
This should sum it up for you. Those are the three major flaws in your argument. It's not about what is right or what should have happened, it's about what did happen and who should be responsible for what part of it.
My apologies, but your arguments here are of very poor quality, and you are fully wrong when you claim they point out any flaws in my arguments. And I have trouble seeing that you are not fully aware of that.
11 ng/ml is high but not actually insane for super druggies. If you are around 20 ng/ml you are probably dead 90+% of the time, but at 11 you may or may not die if you are a habitual user. Some people die around 11, if they are taking it on prescription for the first time.
Interesting, I did not know that, though it does make sense, especially:
[...] but at 11 you would probably survive if you are a habitual user.
I recall having seen something about the level of fentanyl being lethal varying from user to user, and the size of George Floyd as well as possible habitual usage points in the direction of him being able to survive a higher level of fentanyl.
On the other hand, he did also have other drugs in his system, and I recalls something about a heart disease. But still, in case he was a habitual user and/or other, it might possibly mean that his dosage was not necessarily lethal, though of course still very significant.
... a knee on the neck for an extended period of time cannot be helpful, at all. A press release report from Hennepin County Medical Examiner clearly states ( https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/MNHENNE/2020/06/01/file_attachments/1464238/2020-3700%20Floyd,%20George%20Perry%20Update%206.1.2020.pdf ):
And Chauvin kept the knee on Floyd's neck, including after Floyd stopped talking and moving. He could have shifted the knee from his neck onto his back, or rolled Floyd around and give CPR (this might have been unsafe if Floyd was playing possum, but with 4 or more police officers...), or try to see if he could get Floyd to talk or check whether he was conscious, etc., but Chauvin instead just kept having one knee on his neck, not even shifting that knee onto the back or similar. The bystanders didn't help matters, however, since they kept yelling and acting threateningly, which made it more important for the police officers to maintain the pin (George Floyd was not a small man and had a record for violence apart from resisting arrest), but there were still 4 or more police officers. As far as I can tell, Chauvin should be investigated for intentional murder.
That said, the toxicology report reg. George Floyd does show that he had an extreme amount of fentanyl in his blood, an amount that had been lethal in other people (page 15 in https://www.hennepin.us/-/media/hennepinus/residents/public-safety/documents/Autopsy_2020-3700_Floyd.pdf ):
Apart from lots of other stuff in Floyd's blood, such as methamphetamine.
While I am by no means a doctor, as far as I can skim on the net, 11 ng/mL is definitely a lethal dose, as others seem to have died from such a dose, see for instance https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/pdfs/mm6604a4.pdf .
And I recall reading something about Floyd saying "I can't breath" while standing up before he was pinned or restrained. That fits very well with overdoses of various stuff.
It may well have been the case that Floyd was doomed to die from an overdose of various drugs that day without meeting any police officers. But Chauvin's knee on his neck cannot have helped at all, and Chauvin could have done things very, very differently. And then there are the rumours that Chauvin knew Floyd before-hand. It seems really, really strange.
Aside from that George Floyd should not be evangelized at all, given his robberies, home invasions, pointing a gun at a pregnant women, his long criminal record, resisting arrest, possible drug dealing with hard drugs, etc., etc., etc. Donald Trump has already taken action reg. the fentanyl imports that China is using against the USA to spread addiction and death, and from what I hear, Floyd was unemployed due to the Chinese virus.
And the looters obviously ought to spend much or most of their lives in prison.
Definitely not murder because he didn't mean to kill him. The proof of that is that he followed the procedure that he's been taught.
Knee on the back of the neck should not make breathing more difficult. Ironically what you suggested, putting the knee on the back, does prevent breathing. Laying on the stomach is also the best position for breathing, in fact that's how hospitals put the Chinese virus patients who can't breathe. Most people don't know, but the lungs are more in the back than in the front.
Then why does the report (as per https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/MNHENNE/2020/06/01/file_attachments/1464238/2020-3700%20Floyd,%20George%20Perry%20Update%206.1.2020.pdf ) describe the cause of death as follows? (emphasis mine):
They directly name neck compression as a complication reg. the cause of death.
See also the answer by "Paul Harding" in https://www.quora.com/Why-do-police-put-their-knee-on-the-back-of-your-neck-when-cuffing-you . While that is not a proper source, he does write the following:
Do you have any sources of him "following protocol" or "followed the procedure that he's been taught"?
That report is just describing the circumstances. It's not the result of an autopsy. It also mentions "restraint" and that normally doesn't kill people.
Following protocol: the source was just posted by another pede in response to my comment above.
Credit it's his, I'll just relink it here for your convenience
https://www.amren.com/news/2020/06/why-derek-chauvin-may-get-off-his-murder-charge/
You don't comment on the part I wrote reg. "Paul Harding" in https://www.quora.com/Why-do-police-put-their-knee-on-the-back-of-your-neck-when-cuffing-you , again:
"Just describing the circumstances". Why would they specifically mention "neck compression" as a *"complication reg. the cause of death"?
And in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6F62EdX_yg , George Floyd specifically mentions "Please, the knee in my neck, I can't breathe shit.", around 0:20 . Shouldn't protocol demand of Chauvin that he should take special care and consideration and ensure that the suspect resisting arrest can breath and is not dying?
Thank you for the source, though I have to skim through it to find the sources it uses, it is not itself a proper source. It seems to be this file here: https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/sites/default/files/Documents/PoliceCommission/minneapolis%20ced%20policy.pdf (I assume that source is trustworthy, though I wouldn't know, it is also from something like "sanfranciscopolice.org"... why would the police of San Francisco have that file? And why would they use the top-level domain '.org'???). And from that file, I am not at all convinced that Chauvin did indeed follow protocol. Page 7 seems to be the relevant part. What is your argument that Chauvin is indeed following the protocol as described on page 7 and elsewhere? Especially reg. Chauvin continuing to use the neck restraint even after George Floyd stopped moving and talking? And without even checking up on whether he was conscious or breathing? Not changing the restraint? Or any other of a large number of actions? Again, there were 4 or more officers. And when George Floyd says things like:
Isn't that an absolutely obvious cue that special care is needed, especially when Floyd stops moving and talking? Does the protocol require police officers to monitor and check subjects that are restrained whether they are breathing, conscious or possibly dying? Or any other related actions, especially when they have stopped moving and talking while under neck restraint?
Neck compression just means there was pressure on his neck. If you look at the details of the autopsy, there was no bruising of neck muscles, so obviously there wasn’t much pressure exerted at all.
Minneapolis PD guidelines also stated that neck restraints using your leg are legal. They only disallowed chokeholds.
But isn't it significant that it is directly mentioned as a complication reg. the cause of death?
If you have a source reg. that, I would appreciate it if you would post it. The only source I have really seen reg. that is from a medium post (which is copy-pasted on a blog post on a website called amren.com which has been linked elsewhere in the comments here): https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/sites/default/files/Documents/PoliceCommission/minneapolis%20ced%20policy.pdf .The link points to a document on a website supposedly for the San Francisco police department, despite its TLD being .org. I don't know whether that document is fake or not, though I would very much appreciate if you happen to know a better source than that.
You go from the "knee cannot have helped at all" (true) and your conclusion here is he likely committed "intentional murder." See the problem here? You seem to have the logical mindset of a personal injury attorney.
You misquote me. I wrote:
You write:
I think that it at the very least should be investigated for intentional murder, for it seems extremely off in multiple regards (seriously? Kneeling on the neck? Not providing aid or checking? Etc. etc. etc. etc.).
And you also leave out other parts of my argumentation. What about this part of my comment?:
Why did Chauvin not change his pin from having a knee on the neck to having a knee on the back, or otherwise change the pin, after Floyd stopped moving? Why not see if Floyd is conscious or breathing? Or check if he might need CPR? Floyd repeatedly complained about not being able to breath. Does the police officer not have an obligation to provide life-saving measures if a suspect is dying while being pinned, especially given that the suspect nor others can help in such a case? The bystanders did not help matters at all, but there was still 4+ police officers.
And then there is the possible part about Floyd and Chauvin knowing each other, which I also mention.
What you are advocating for is wrong, as is your reasoning and here's why:
Officers know or have at least heard of people who have extremely long wrap sheets that involve violent crime and serious drug abuse. So, that information is irrelevant on it's own unless you can prove that Chauvin responded to a call specifically because it involved Floyd but even then that seems pretty flimsy.
There are protocols in place for virtually every type of arrest situation. If Chauvin and his fellow officers are following that protocol, by definition they are not at fault. Again you need to have some basic understanding of how police work or any bureaucratic agency works. Doesn't make his actions righteous or "good," but it does make them "not criminal." So, if they are following protocol then there is no case at all.
Not administering help to Floyd is only a crime if it is apparent to the officer that he is in need of medical help AND that they can safely provide it to him. If they did see he needed help and failed to provide it- which is very hard to prove considering the scene of the incident- then that is still not "intentional murder" but rather some degree of potentially criminal negligence.
This should sum it up for you. Those are the three major flaws in your argument. It's not about what is right or what should have happened, it's about what did happen and who should be responsible for what part of it.
This argument does not make any sense, Chauvin did not have to know at all that it was Floyd before responding, he could very easily recognize that it was Floyd once he was on the scene.
Sources for what protocols they were or were not following? Sources and arguments for Chauvin and others actually following these protocols? Do all protocols specify everything in great detail? Or do they require officers to follow them meaningfully? And are you certain that Chauvin did not break, or grossly break, these protocols?
.............................. do you even believe your own writing here?
And in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6F62EdX_yg , George Floyd specifically mentions the following around 0:20:
EDIT: and him not moving or talking at some point, with others pointing it out? They talking about him possibly being drugged up? Etc. etc. etc. etc.?
My apologies, but your arguments here are of very poor quality, and you are fully wrong when you claim they point out any flaws in my arguments. And I have trouble seeing that you are not fully aware of that.
11 ng/ml is high but not actually insane for super druggies. If you are around 20 ng/ml you are probably dead 90+% of the time, but at 11 you may or may not die if you are a habitual user. Some people die around 11, if they are taking it on prescription for the first time.
Interesting, I did not know that, though it does make sense, especially:
I recall having seen something about the level of fentanyl being lethal varying from user to user, and the size of George Floyd as well as possible habitual usage points in the direction of him being able to survive a higher level of fentanyl.
On the other hand, he did also have other drugs in his system, and I recalls something about a heart disease. But still, in case he was a habitual user and/or other, it might possibly mean that his dosage was not necessarily lethal, though of course still very significant.